What stands out to me is that this creates another 'key' that the browser sends on every request which can be fingerprinted or tracked by the server.
I do not want my browser sending anything that looks like it could be used to uniquely identify me. Ever.
I want every request my browser makes to look like any other request made by another user's browser. I understand that this is what Google doesn't want but why can't they just be honest about it? Why come up with these elaborate lies?
Now to limit tracking exposure, in addition to running the AutoCookieDelete extension I'll have to go find some AutoDictionaryDelete extension to go with it. Boy am I glad the internet is getting better every day.
You're making three assertions, none backed by any evidence. That this is a tracking vector, that it's primarily intended to be a tracking vector, and that they're lying about their motivations.
But your reasoning fails already at the first step, since you just assumed malice rather than do any research. This is not a useful tracking vector. The storage is partitioned by the top window, and it is cleared when cookies are cleared. It's also not really a new tracking vector, it's pretty much the same as ETags.
> to protect Americans’ sensitive personal data from exploitation by countries of concern
When does America classify itself as a country of concern? I'd personally much rather have my data exfiltrated to China where it can't be used against me as easily.
"National security data risk" is a funny way of saying "risk to the profits of the domestic car companies." If it was about spying it'd broadly apply to all vehicles and not just those imported.
And what about the other non-Chinese foreign automakers. Are they not also spying?
Do you think this would stop at the big boys like Facebook and Twitter?
What about Reddit? If I post a story in r/AITAH that the other person discovers, this opens Reddit up to a possible libel lawsuit if the other person thinks I'm not being truthful. Do you think that's a risk that Reddit's legal department will let them take? I highly doubt it. Do you think unpaid volunteer mods want to be legally liable if they remove a post for violating guidelines?
Let's go another level deeper, your neighborhood's Nextdoor forum. If Susan from down the road starts saying I slept with her husband to bad mouth me on the app, I could not just sue Susan for libel, but I can also include Nextdoor in the lawsuit. Do you think Nextdoor's legal team will allow that? Again, nope. But Nextdoor wouldn't be able to remove Susan's post because it would be "silencing her freedom of speech". So instead, Nextdoor takes the logical legal decision to completely remove any user-generated posts, effectively killing their product.
And another level deeper, some random classic car forum with maybe 100 users per month. What do they do? I think you get the hint.
This isn't just going to affect social media platforms. This will affect all platforms that allow users to post in any capacity, text, photos, videos, links, etc.
Your presence here is your answer. Why are you here if social media doesn't provide any value?
You'd have to be braindead to not understand the immense value social media has added to society. But like all things, social media has it's negative aspects. But just because social media isn't perfect, doesn't mean it has no value. As I said, your presence here is proof of that.
Their presence here does not indicate they value their time here in a net-positive way. It offers no proof whatsoever.
They could be addicted. FOMO could drive them to compulsively check the site. It might be their only social interaction at all during the workday. This might be the only group of people on the internet with similar interests.
None of those things would necessarily make it a net-good thing, if it also has negative repercussions that outweight the benefits. Many drugs, legal and illegal, are fairly harmful. Sometimes the benefits are worth the negatives. Sometimes they are very firmly not. Much of the anti-social-media position is about social media being addicting and net-harmful.
I personally don't see the immense value that you see. I've seen some value for some specific sites for some short, specific times. My grandma could interact with some of her grandkids for a short while on Facebook, for instance. Of course, she (or we) used to just pick up the phone, which is what happens now too.
I've seen some cool projects on HN I'd otherwise likely never have seen.
Otherwise I'm drawing a blank.
> None of those things would necessarily make it a net-good thing
Who is talking 'net' here? The commenter simply questioned whether social media added any value to society. To deny social media has provided any value to society is as braindead as denying that fossil fuels added value to society. Now whether the negatives outweight the positives ( aka net value ) is an entirely different question.
> My grandma could interact with some of her grandkids for a short while on Facebook, for instance. Of course, she (or we) used to just pick up the phone, which is what happens now too. I've seen some cool projects on HN I'd otherwise likely never have seen.
Oh so it does provide value. So you are agreeing with me then?
> Otherwise I'm drawing a blank.
You aren't braindead. You are disingenuous. So you never asked for or search for information on reddit, hn, stackoverflow, etc. You never found solutions to problems on tiktok, youtube, etc? You don't know anyone who found a job via hn, linkedin, etc? Bought or sold stuff on facebook, etc?
If you believe that the negatives of social media outweigh the positives of social media, then fine. That's your opinion. But to cavalierly dismiss or deny that social media provides value to society is being disingenuous at best or braindead at worst. Or more likely agenda driven nonsense.
Your comment reminds me of this excellent monty python clip: What have the romans done for us?
This is just another play to give out more Azure credits to anyone that can feasibly consume them. Azure credits show up as unearned revenue on their SEC filings where they state that they "expect to recognize approximately 45% of this revenue over the next 12 months and the remainder thereafter".
It's wild that you can give out gift cards that make your company's value go up so much more than the gift cards could ever cost you. It's almost like one of those financial schemes that end badly.
MSFT needs companies like OpenAI to give Azure credits to for their valuation to continue soaring. The deferred revenue on their balance sheet from the unspent Azure credits they give as investment are worth much more to their market cap than $80B.
I do not want my browser sending anything that looks like it could be used to uniquely identify me. Ever.
I want every request my browser makes to look like any other request made by another user's browser. I understand that this is what Google doesn't want but why can't they just be honest about it? Why come up with these elaborate lies?
Now to limit tracking exposure, in addition to running the AutoCookieDelete extension I'll have to go find some AutoDictionaryDelete extension to go with it. Boy am I glad the internet is getting better every day.